Title
MOTION TO AWARD IFB # TS-24-06 "NETWORK CAMERAS" TO THE MOST RESPONSIVE/RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, HYPERTEC USA, INC., IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $104,544.92.
Summary Explanation and Background
PROCUREMENT PROCESS TAKEN:
- Chapter 35 of the City’s Code of Ordinances is titled “PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES, PUBLIC FUNDS.”
- Section 35.15 defines an Invitation for Bid as “A written solicitation for competitive sealed bids with the title, date and hour of the public bid opening designated therein and specifically defining the commodities or services for which bids are sought. The invitation for bid shall be used when the city is capable of specifically defining the scope of work for which a service is required or when the city is capable of establishing 15 precise specifications defining the actual commodities required. The invitation for bid shall include instructions to bidders, plans, drawings and specifications, if any, bid form and other required forms and documents to be submitted with the bid.”
- Section 35.18 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "COMPETITIVE BIDDING OR COMPETITIVE PROPOSALS REQUIRED; EXCEPTIONS.”
- Section 35.18(A) states, "A purchase of or contracts for commodities or services that is estimated by the Chief Procurement Officer to cost more than $25,000 shall be based on sealed competitive solicitations as determined by the Chief Procurement Officer, except as specifically provided herein."
- Section 35.19 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "SEALED COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCEDURE."
- Section 35.19(A) states "All sealed competitive solicitations as defined in § 35.18 shall be presented to the City Commission for their consideration prior to advertisement."
- Section 35.21 of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "AWARD OF CONTRACT."
- Section 35.21(A) of the City's Code of Ordinances is titled "City Commission approval.
- Section 35.21(A)(1) states, "An initial purchase of, or contract for, commodities or services, in excess of $25,000, shall require the approval of the City Commission, regardless of whether the competitive bidding or competitive proposal procedures were followed."
SUMMARY EXPLANATION AND BACKGROUND:
1. On April 3, 2024, the City Commission authorized the advertisement of IFB # TS-24-06 "Network Cameras", which was advertised on April 9, 2024.
2. On May 7, 2024, the City opened twenty-three (23) proposals from the following vendors, listed in ascending order:
|
Vendor |
Total Cost |
|
Hypertec USA, Inc |
$ 146,814.68 |
|
K&M Communications Corp |
$ 150,709.37 |
|
Bryant Integrated Technologies |
$ 155,812.41 |
|
Axelliant LLC |
$ 157,113.34 |
|
Gerelcom, Inc. |
$ 159,234.35 |
|
ATTRACTING SOLUTIONS INC |
$ 160,380.41 |
|
Focus Camera LLC |
$ 161,588.43 |
|
B & H Foto & Electronics Corp. |
$ 162,490.00 |
|
ClearConnect |
$ 170,568.45 |
|
Taza Supplies LLC |
$ 174,580.00 |
|
SOLOTECH SALES & INTEGRATION |
$ 178,958.00 |
|
vPrime Tech Inc |
$ 179,761.38 |
|
Technology Partners Group LLC |
$ 181,257.05 |
|
vCloud Tech Inc |
$ 186,241.31 |
|
Jaak Technologies LLC |
$ 189,703.77 |
|
C&C International Computers and Consultants, Inc. |
$ 189,857.00 |
|
Jaak Tech LLC |
$ 190,483.04 |
|
STEM Consultants Inc |
$ 193,627.19 |
|
Alpha Security & Fire Alarm Services, Inc. |
$ 195,382.00 |
|
Apple Communication |
$ 196,773.00 |
|
X-Gen Digital LLC |
$ 198,371.00 |
|
CnergyPro Global Solutions LLC |
$ 204,732.75 |
|
MARYVINE GROUP CORPORATION |
$ 227,085.92 |
3. During the evaluation process, the Procurement Department initiated communications with the vendors to ascertain pricing for the requested items. Subsequently, it was discerned that Line Item # 2, for the Axis Q1798-LE Network Camera, and Line Item # 8, for the Axis P3737-PLE Network Camera, were both end-of-life products that are no longer being produced. As a result, the Technology Services Department has decided that they will no longer be purchasing those line items and will look for alternative options in the future. Below is the total cost for each vendor without Line Items # 2 & 8, listed in ascending order:
|
VendorTotal Cost |
|
|
Hypertec USA, Inc |
$ 104,544.92 |
|
K&M Communications Corp |
$ 107,210.97 |
|
Bryant Integrated Technologies |
$ 110,985.69 |
|
Gerelcom, Inc. |
$ 113,311.15 |
|
ATTRACTING SOLUTIONS INC |
$ 114,178.81 |
|
B & H Foto & Electronics Corp. |
$ 114,522.00 |
|
Focus Camera LLC |
$ 115,043.31 |
|
ClearConnect |
$ 121,431.81 |
|
Taza Supplies LLC |
$ 124,324.00 |
|
SOLOTECH SALES & INTEGRATION |
$ 127,438.00 |
|
Technology Partners Group LLC |
$ 129,040.89 |
|
vPrime Tech Inc |
$ 130,585.70 |
|
Axelliant LLC |
$ 131,229.82 |
|
vCloud Tech Inc |
$ 132,581.47 |
|
Jaak Technologies LLC |
$ 135,057.21 |
|
Jaak Tech LLC |
$ 135,611.68 |
|
STEM Consultants Inc |
$ 137,479.03 |
|
C&C International Computers and Consultants, Inc. |
$ 137,921.00 |
|
Alpha Security & Fire Alarm Services, Inc. |
$ 139,126.00 |
|
Apple Communication |
$ 140,405.00 |
|
X-Gen Digital LLC |
$ 141,635.00 |
|
CnergyPro Global Solutions LLC |
$ 150,365.55 |
|
MARYVINE GROUP CORPORATION |
$ 161,667.84 |
4. The Technology Services Department reviewed the proposals and deemed Hypertec USA, Inc., to be the most responsive/responsible proposer.
5. In addition, Hypertec USA, Inc. has also completed the Equal Benefits Certification Form and has stated that the "Contractor currently complies with the requirements of this section."
6. Request Commission to award IFB # TS-24-06 " Network Cameras" to the most responsive/responsible bidder, Hypertec USA, Inc., in the amount not to exceed $104,544.92.
Financial Impact
FINANCIAL IMPACT DETAIL:
a) Initial Cost: Amount not to exceed $104,544.92
b) Amount budgeted for this item in Account No: Funds will be available account # # 001-513-2002-552650-0000-000-0000-00308 (Non-capital Equipment)
c) Source of funding for difference, if not fully budgeted: Not Applicable.
d) 5 year projection of the operational cost of the project:
|
|
Year 1 |
Year 2 |
Year 3 |
Year 4 |
Year 5 |
|
Revenues |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
|
Expenditures |
$104,544.92 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
|
Net Cost |
$104,544.92 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
e) Detail of additional staff requirements: Not Applicable.
FEASIBILITY REVIEW:
A feasibility review is required for the award, renewal and/or expiration of all function sourcing contracts. This analysis is to determine the financial effectiveness of function sourcing services.
a) Was a Feasibility Review/Cost Analysis of Out-Sourcing vs. In-House Labor Conducted for this service? Not Applicable.
b) If Yes, what is the total cost or total savings of utilizing Out-Sourcing vs. In-House Labor for this service? Not Applicable.